Are we underestimating exposures from NORM dust?

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Pub Date : 2025-09-26 DOI:10.1093/annweh/wxaf043

Gregory Stanley Hewson, Martin Ian Ralph, Marcus Cattani

{"title":"Are we underestimating exposures from NORM dust?","authors":"Gregory Stanley Hewson, Martin Ian Ralph, Marcus Cattani","doi":"10.1093/annweh/wxaf043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The inhalation of dust containing naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) associated with mining and mineral processing operations may lead to potential long-term health impacts, including cancer and chronic lung disease, due to alpha particle-emitting radionuclides. This study evaluates the effectiveness of air sampling strategies used to estimate radiation doses from NORM exposure, with a focus on the Western Australian minerals industry. The objectives were to review current sampling and analysis protocols, identify factors contributing to over- or underestimation of dose, and propose adjustments to improve intake assessments. A review of research and guidelines applicable to NORM dust exposure was conducted, and the sampling efficiency of the government-recommended 7-hole and IOM sample heads was compared, considering measured dust particle size distributions. Key inhalation-related parameters, including use of similar exposure group (SEG) mean concentrations, worker breathing rates, median dust particle size, and intake-to-dose conversion factors, were analysed to assess their influence on intake calculations. The findings indicate that use of the 7-hole sampler, currently recommended by local guidelines, may underestimate airborne radioactivity concentrations by 2-fold or more, primarily due to reduced sampling efficiency for larger particles. Standard default assumptions for breathing rates and aerosol characteristics used to convert the measured concentrations to intake and dose may further contribute to underestimation. This study recommends updating air sampling methods and dose assessment protocols to better align with workplace-specific exposure conditions and improve worker health protection in NORM industries.</p>","PeriodicalId":8362,"journal":{"name":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","volume":" ","pages":"820-831"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12463559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxaf043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The inhalation of dust containing naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) associated with mining and mineral processing operations may lead to potential long-term health impacts, including cancer and chronic lung disease, due to alpha particle-emitting radionuclides. This study evaluates the effectiveness of air sampling strategies used to estimate radiation doses from NORM exposure, with a focus on the Western Australian minerals industry. The objectives were to review current sampling and analysis protocols, identify factors contributing to over- or underestimation of dose, and propose adjustments to improve intake assessments. A review of research and guidelines applicable to NORM dust exposure was conducted, and the sampling efficiency of the government-recommended 7-hole and IOM sample heads was compared, considering measured dust particle size distributions. Key inhalation-related parameters, including use of similar exposure group (SEG) mean concentrations, worker breathing rates, median dust particle size, and intake-to-dose conversion factors, were analysed to assess their influence on intake calculations. The findings indicate that use of the 7-hole sampler, currently recommended by local guidelines, may underestimate airborne radioactivity concentrations by 2-fold or more, primarily due to reduced sampling efficiency for larger particles. Standard default assumptions for breathing rates and aerosol characteristics used to convert the measured concentrations to intake and dose may further contribute to underestimation. This study recommends updating air sampling methods and dose assessment protocols to better align with workplace-specific exposure conditions and improve worker health protection in NORM industries.

查看原文本刊更多论文

我们是否低估了NORM粉尘的暴露？

吸入与采矿和矿物加工作业有关的含有天然放射性物质（NORM）的粉尘可能导致潜在的长期健康影响，包括由于释放α粒子的放射性核素而导致的癌症和慢性肺病。本研究评估了用于估计NORM暴露辐射剂量的空气采样策略的有效性，重点是西澳大利亚矿业。目的是审查目前的抽样和分析方案，确定导致剂量高估或低估的因素，并提出调整建议以改进摄入量评估。本文回顾了适用于规范粉尘暴露的研究和指南，并比较了政府推荐的7孔取样头和IOM取样头的取样效率，考虑到测量的粉尘粒径分布。分析了与吸入相关的关键参数，包括使用相似暴露组（SEG）平均浓度、工人呼吸率、中位粉尘粒径和摄入-剂量转换因子，以评估它们对摄入计算的影响。研究结果显示，使用本地指引所建议的七孔采样器，可能会将空气中的放射性浓度低估两倍或更多，主要原因是对较大颗粒的采样效率降低。用于将测量的浓度转换为摄入量和剂量的呼吸速率和气溶胶特性的标准默认假设可能进一步导致低估。本研究建议更新空气采样方法和剂量评估方案，以更好地适应工作场所特定的暴露条件，并改善规范行业工人的健康保护。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

19.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： About the Journal Annals of Work Exposures and Health is dedicated to presenting advances in exposure science supporting the recognition, quantification, and control of exposures at work, and epidemiological studies on their effects on human health and well-being. A key question we apply to submission is, "Is this paper going to help readers better understand, quantify, and control conditions at work that adversely or positively affect health and well-being?" We are interested in high quality scientific research addressing: the quantification of work exposures, including chemical, biological, physical, biomechanical, and psychosocial, and the elements of work organization giving rise to such exposures; the relationship between these exposures and the acute and chronic health consequences for those exposed and their families and communities; populations at special risk of work-related exposures including women, under-represented minorities, immigrants, and other vulnerable groups such as temporary, contingent and informal sector workers; the effectiveness of interventions addressing exposure and risk including production technologies, work process engineering, and personal protective systems; policies and management approaches to reduce risk and improve health and well-being among workers, their families or communities; methodologies and mechanisms that underlie the quantification and/or control of exposure and risk. There is heavy pressure on space in the journal, and the above interests mean that we do not usually publish papers that simply report local conditions without generalizable results. We are also unlikely to publish reports on human health and well-being without information on the work exposure characteristics giving rise to the effects. We particularly welcome contributions from scientists based in, or addressing conditions in, developing economies that fall within the above scope.